An editors dream

~ Thursday April 02 2009 18:00
It’s almost time for NAB 2009. And although Apple won’t go to trade shows anymore, most people believe that Final Cut Studio 3 is around the corner. There are already lots of speculations about what the update could be. This is my wish list of what I would like to see in the new version. I have no sources at Apple, I base this all on what I’d want for myself.

A new uniform User Interface. Final Cut Studio 2 doesn’t look bad, but when you see what the Apple developers did with the interface of Aperture and Logic, I think there is lots that could change. But not just that. I’d want a package that would look like I’m working with one application. Most of the applications now have things in common: A timeline, a browser, a canvas and an inspector. And although I can send a project to another application with the ‘send to’ command, it’s only mimicking that controls are the same. But they don’t look the same, nor do they really talk to each other in the background. If I change the color in motion, I want to do it with Colors’ controls.

Why would this be handy? When your offline is done with the same files as the online, it may not be so obvious. But what if I’m working with some future RED resolution. I can’t edit that in realtime, at least not at full resolution. But if I’d do any correction or animation with low res (offline) media, I’d have to jump through hoops or start over, to get the same end result. Especially if it’s something I did in more than one (current) application.

Project management is something that’s really bad right now. What I would like to see is a project manager that makes sure that everything the project needs is included. I want one file that is the project. Something like how the iPhoto Library is setup. (You can still see its’ contents if you’d want to) I want version control built in, so that when I open the project I get the latest version, but I can always go back to an old version. Apple Color does this pretty well, actually. Also I want render files, capture files, imported media, everything included auto-magically.

I want to be able to open a project on more than one computer. The project should know who has what timeline or part open. That way an editor and assistant can actually work on the same project.

When I’m done with a project, I want to actually lock it. And use that data to consolidate archive it properly. And again, not just the edit, the whole project.

Simple request: include spotlight and everything from iMovie. Include, not replace the traditional way of doing things. Also the node based compositing from shake and color, build it in.

I want a simple API to make import/export/roundtrip plugins for (online) distribution and outsourcing. From a simple upload to youTube to full Digital Cinema export. Make it simple to send something to animators, sound people, who all probably use different applications. Integrate it into Automator, so that everyone can use it. Let me decide how I want to build my workflow.

Sub timelines: Like how Logic deals with multiple recordings of a region. Just twirl open a shot to just reveal the source clip or the buildup of an effect. with version control. Focus on a region to make animating easier.

Qmaster Background Nodes: I want to be able to do every bit of rendering through Qmaster Nodes. Why should only compressor be able to use the power of a render network. When I’m rendering from Color and Motion, I want the same render power to be available. Now, Snow Leopard will definitely be a step forward, since it will probably be better equipped with using multiple cores, with one threated applications. But why stop there? If I have multiple machines, I want to be on them.

Another idea is Facility Builder. Facility builder is Qadministrator on steroids. You can tell Qmaster Facility Builder what the different nodes in the system are. For instance two Mac Pro’s are the main systems that both can submit jobs, the mac mini’s and xserves are full render nodes and the iMacs are only partially available. Let’s say the two Mac Pro’s are each in an edit suite. When one suite is empty, all of the nodes are available to the one Mac Pro. Then the second editor begins his work, now the nodes are split in two. If necessary of course, because if he just needs one node for a simple edit job, all the other nodes are available to the first suite.

Also, the system should be able to show the user what the bottlenecks of the facility are and what would be a wise course of action to upgrade. Maybe you just need a faster network, because you have enough cores. Maybe it’s the other way around because your 4K clips take forever to render. I want future projection based on project history or speed-test the nodes for new technologies like the 28K RED Epic.

Maybe it’s a bad of hurt for iLife users, but Blu-Ray is not a freakin’ bag of hurt for us professionals. It’s the logical next step after DVD, while there’s no real alternative. Also, there are no bonus features on iTunes, while my clients ask for it. I want Blu-Ray authoring for the mac done right. So I’d want to be able to create BD Live functionality if I want to. Include custom Java if I’d want to. Or keep it simple if I don’t. And I don’t want a second Xcode, but I want to be able to use my Xcode JAVA apps in my project if I want to. For iTunes or Podcasting we want better tools for subtitles, multiple audio-streams and clickable content. Just ask Alex Lindsay from the Pixelcorps about that last one.

Final Cut Server is something I don’t use, because it is something I regard as a group management program. I don’t know if Apple regards it as such, but they should. I think Final Cut Studio should be something that a small facility could use. Final Cut Server is something for networks and big operations. I can see it as a project managers’ tool. The Project Manager could setup the import/export/roundtrip plugins for a whole pipeline and divide work between people. For instance animation. In a large project, the Visual Effects supervisor is the one that usually decides who gets to work on which shot, not the editor. So the Editor sends it to VFX and the Supervisor can log into Final Cut Server and redirect it to the different animators. If the animator is done, he submits it back to his supervisor. If the supervisor agrees, it can be submitted to the director. If everyone responds quick, it could be instant feedback for the animator.

Enough ideas? Again, this is just speculating and probably most of it won’t come true. But an editor can hope, can’t he?

Comments are disabled for this blog due to abuse.